Warbird Information Exchange

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on this site are the responsibility of the poster and do not reflect the views of the management.
It is currently Sat Apr 27, 2024 10:11 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Classic Wings Magazine WWII Naval Aviation Research Pacific Luftwaffe Resource Center
When Hollywood Ruled The Skies - Volumes 1 through 4 by Bruce Oriss


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2024 6:57 pm 
Offline
2000+ Post Club
2000+ Post Club

Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 3:45 pm
Posts: 2537
What was the reasoning for adding a prop spinner to the AT-6F/SNJ-6 airframes after 90% of AT-6 production was already accomplished? Was there improvement in engine cooling, airspeed or fuel consumption?

Image


Additionally I found this photo which is dated Aug. 45 and this BT-13/15 has a prop spinner. Did BT's get spinners as well during late production?
(If the date is correct I was unaware that PT's and BT's were being sold to the public by this date.)
https://collections.lib.utah.edu/detail ... _s=dha_%2A

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2024 10:08 pm 
Offline
Long Time Member
Long Time Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 12:27 am
Posts: 5258
Location: Eastern Washington
I can't say I have seen a Vultee with a spinner, but then again I haven't looked.
As far as aircraft being sold surplus before the end of the war, I have seen several instances of trainers being offered....AT-9s, AT-21s, UC-78s, and some less common types like Ryans, Timms, Spartans.

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 21, 2024 5:09 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 3:01 pm
Posts: 107
Location: N Yorkshire
Saw this Vultee at Harlingen in 86

ImageCAF Airshow 86 by Paul Stroud, on Flickr


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 21, 2024 6:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 5:37 am
Posts: 84
Location: Grimsby, UK
Quote: "Additionally I found this photo which is dated Aug. 45 and this BT-13/15 has a prop spinner. Did BT's get spinners as well during late production?
(If the date is correct I was unaware that PT's and BT's were being sold to the public by this date.)
"

Apologies for diverting from the main query....

It should born in mind that many of the Contract Primary Schools were closed during 1944.
There are numerous examples were the AAF record cards show the PT was transferred to the RFC during late 1944.
I have seen a few entries on the FAA Registry of Fairchild PT-19s and PT-23s with a registration issue date between October and December 1944.
Check these - PT-19As N47216, N47594, N47702 and PT-19B N47642.

"Surplus WWII U.S. Aircraft" (William T. Larkins) shows 1945 examples of surplus BT-13s, also 1945 RFC Sales lists including various PTs and BTs.
Surplus sales of Trainer types clearly began well before the war ended.
M-62A


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 22, 2024 9:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 10:22 pm
Posts: 110
Location: Spokane, WA
I think the primary benefit of the spinner is to protect the propeller. The counterweighted Hamilton Standard props have exposed bearings and the "piston" of the prop is a slightly delicate surface. Operating in dirty/dusty environments the spinner protects the prop. My experience is that a standard Montgomery spinner on a HS prop does nothing for speed or cooling. The backing plates are known to crack, so the spinner itself can be a bit of a maintenance issue.

_________________
Ryan Pemberton
www.pembertonandsons.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 25, 2024 9:48 am 
Offline
Been here a long time
Been here a long time

Joined: Sun May 02, 2004 1:16 am
Posts: 11282
TheBoy wrote:
I think the primary benefit of the spinner is to protect the propeller. The counterweighted Hamilton Standard props have exposed bearings and the "piston" of the prop is a slightly delicate surface. Operating in dirty/dusty environments the spinner protects the prop. My experience is that a standard Montgomery spinner on a HS prop does nothing for speed or cooling. The backing plates are known to crack, so the spinner itself can be a bit of a maintenance issue.
I have "heard" that they were installed by the military for use in Korea to prevent snow & ice from fouling the counterweight mechanism.

Seems to have little to no speed advantage. Reno racers had done without them recently and went faster than ever. The Montgomery 42J15621 spinner adds about 12 pounds to the nose of the aircraft.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: kalamazookid and 356 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group